NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
The Effect of John Hinckley Jr. on the Insanity Defense The insanity defense has always been a very controversial issue in the United States. Many people do not believe that by being classified as insane is a viable excuse for committing a crime, especially one as heinous as murder. There are many opponents to the use of the insanity plea because they feel that those who are found not guilty by reason of insanity are not punished for their criminal actions. Over time there have been several changes made to the defense plea, but it was not until the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan by John Hinckley, Jr.
that the insanity defense came under high scrutiny in the United States and many Americans called for reform. On March 30, 1981 John Hinckley, Jr. did the unthinkable. As President Reagan and several members of his staff exited the Washington Hilton Hotel Hinckley opened fire. Once the shots rang out secret service agents grabbed President Reagan, put him into a limousine and brought him to safety.
It was not until later that the agents realized that the president had been wounded, along with three other individuals. The president was brought to George Washington Hospital where he underwent surgery to repair a collapsed lung and other damage that was caused by the. 22 caliber bullet that passed through his ribs. Hinckley was arrested at the scene and charged with 13 counts of criminal activity, which included the attempted assassination of President Reagan, assault with a deadly weapon, and assault with the intent to kill. The one thing that made this case unique was the fact that Hinckley's actions were captured on film, which proved without a doubt that Hinckley was the gunman. This fact left Hinckley's defense team with one course of action, to plead not guilty by reason of insanity. In the time that led up to the assassination attempt Hinckley had developed an unhealthy obsession with actress Jodie Foster.
Hinckley had written several letters to the young actress, professing his love for her. He was so obsessed with Foster that he never mailed the letters to her; he would slip them under the door of her room at Yale University where she was a student at the time. Hinckley had also developed an obsession with the movie, Taxi Driver, in which Foster starred. Hinckley began to imitate the life of the movies lead character, Travis Bickle, played by Robert Di Niro. Hinckley believed that he was Travis Bickle, and began to dress like him, eat the same foods as Bickle, and even picked up teenage prostitutes. One time Hinckley even registered at a hotel under the name Travis Bickle.
The defense used Hinckley's obsessions with Foster and Taxi Driver to paint a picture of Hinckley as a mentally disturbed individual that could not tell reality from fantasy. The defense team used Dr. Carpenter, an expert in schizophrenia to establish the fact that Hinckley could not distinguish between reality and fantasy. The intent of the defense team was to show the jury that the actions of John Hinckley, Jr. on March 30, 1981 were not those of a sane man, but of a man who believed that he was a character from a movie. Throughout the trial the defense team put several more witnesses on the stand to illustrate Hinckley's mental status on the day in question.
Two experts for the defense, Dr. Ernest Prelinger and Dr. Thomas Goldman, testified that Hinckley was not emotionally aware of his actions on this day and that he acted out because of his obsession with Jodie Foster. Hinckley believed that by killing the president he would impress Foster, and cause her to call in love with him. The defense argued that these are clearly not the actions of someone who thinks rationally, they were the actions of an individual who mixes fantasy with reality. When the trial ended it took just 4 days for the jury to answer the question was Hinckley guilty, or was he not guilty by reason of insanity?
They concluded that, Hinckley was insane when he shot President Reagan, and he was acquitted of all criminal charges. After the acquittal Hinckley was committed to St. Elizabeth's Mental Hospital in Washington D. C. for treatment.
The country was horrified and outraged with a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity for the man who attempted to kill the president. People could not understand how Hinckley was acquitted based upon the evidence against him. For starters, the incident was caught on tape and witnessed by many individuals, leaving no question in the minds of Americans as to who did it. There also appeared to be a pattern of presidential stalking by Hinckley.
There was television footage of Hinckley being present at President Jimmy Carters visit to Ohio. Also there were records of Hinckley attending target practice at a shooting range in Denver in the months prior to the assassination attempt. To many these actions sounded like the premeditated behavior of a sane individual. The evidence that appeared to be the most damaging against Hinckley was a letter that he wrote to Jodie Foster hours before the attempt, confessing to the murder of President Reagan. The outrage that many Americans felt over Hinckley's acquittal despite the despite the evidence against him lasted for several years.
Americans wanted a change in the system and many felt as if the insanity defense was nothing more than a get out of jail free card. In the months following Hinckley's acquittal congress was aware of the outrage that the American public felt and decided that it was time to act. Committees in both the House of Representatives and the Senate met to discuss the usage of the insanity defense. Over a 3 -year period following Hinckley's acquittal, several changes were made by both congress and the states that not limited the use of the insanity plea, but also put restrictions on its usage. In 1984 congress passed the Insanity Defense Reform Act.
This act states that the insanity defense is an affirmative defense to a prosecution under any federal statute that, at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the defendant as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, was unable to appreciate the nature and quality of the wrongfulness of his acts. Mental disease does not otherwise constitute a defense. Another change as a result of Hinckley's case was the establishment of the guilty but mentally ill verdict, which was adopted by 12 states. This verdict allowed a defendant that was pleading insanity to be found guilty of the criminal action and to receive criminal punishment, while providing psychiatric treatment for the defendant. When this verdict was handed down the now convicted criminal was to be evaluated by psychiatric experts to determine the course of treatment. Once the necessary treatment is given, and the individual is cured they are then sent to prison to pay their debt to society.
In more than half of the states that allow and recognize the insanity defense as an acceptable defense plea, the state makes it the defendants responsibility to persuade the jury that he or she was insane at the time of the offense. In order to do this the defendant must be able to offer, proof by preponderance of the evidence that is of greater weight or is more convincing that the evidence which is offered in opposition to it; that is evidence which as a whole shows the fact sought to be proved is more provable than not. Although the insanity defense is an acceptable defense plea in the United States there are 3 states, Montana, Idaho, and Utah have abolished it all together. However, these states continue to admit evidence of a mental disorder for the restricted purpose of disproving criminal intent to trial. This means that the defendant did not have the knowledge or intent at the time of the offense needed for the conviction of the offense that they were charged with. Bibliography: Collins, Kimberly; Hikebein, Gabe; School, Staci, The Trial of John Hinckley, Jr. , in Famous Trials in American History, par. 1 [online journal] (cited 3 December, 2000); available from the World Wide Web at web
Free research essays on topics related to: guilty by reason, assassination attempt, insanity defense, reason of insanity, insanity plea
Research essay sample on Guilty By Reason Reason Of Insanity
